Response to "Comment on 'Binding Debye-Hückel theory for associative electrolyte solutions'" J. Chem. Phys. 159, 154503 (2023)

This Response addresses critiques raised about the Binding Debye-Hückel (BiDH) theory [Naseri Boroujeni et al., J. Chem. Phys. 159, 154503 (2023)] by Simonin and Bernard [J.-P. Simonin and O. Bernard, J. Chem. Phys. (2024)]. The critiques questioned the foundational framework of the Debye-Hückel (DH) theory, the relevance of ion pairing in primitive model fluids, and the accuracy of the BiDH model compared to mean spherical approximation model. Through a systematic rebuttal, supported by extensive literature review and comparison with Monte Carlo simulation data, this Response addresses these concerns. It demonstrates the efficacy of DH theory in describing real electrolyte solutions, validates the relevance of ion pairing in primitive model fluids, and establishes the BiDH model's accuracy in describing electrolyte properties.This Response addresses critiques raised about the Binding Debye-Hückel (BiDH) theory [Naseri Boroujeni et al., J. Chem. Phys. 159, 154503 (2023)] by Simonin and Bernard [J.-P. Simonin and O. Bernard, J. Chem. Phys. (2024)]. The critiques questioned the foundational framework of the Debye-Hückel (DH) theory, the relevance of ion pairing in primitive model fluids, and the accuracy of the BiDH model compared to mean spherical approximation model. Through a systematic rebuttal, supported by extensive literature review and comparison with Monte Carlo simulation data, this Response addresses these concerns. It demonstrates the efficacy of DH theory in describing real electrolyte solutions, validates the relevance of ion pairing in primitive model fluids, and establishes the BiDH model's accuracy in describing electrolyte properties.